HOLLYWOOD STOCK EXCHANGE
THE ENTERTAINMENT MARKET
THE ENTERTAINMENT MARKET
I should clarify a few things here...
First of all, I've never said that America should be gun-free. Instead, I've posted more than once on this board that it would be unpopular, impractical and unconstitutional to do so.
You might not want to answer my question, but the obvious answer (to me) is that America's gun policies do a lousy job of keeping dangerous weapons out of the hands of mentally ill people who want to use them to kill people. I don't think that should be controversial. Certainly, I think it is less controversial than "America is a sick, violent society" - which I don't believe. So the next question for me is, "how does America change its gun control policies to improve public safety, without a significant impact on the rights of gun owners?". A non-intrusive, quick but compulsory background check process would be a good start.
I share your concerns on how background checks etc would impact the mentally ill. I wouldn't want - for example - someone to not seek treatment because they are worried about losing their guns. Obviously that's a perverse outcome that would be bad for everyone. But it's a reason for care to be taken in designing the policy, not a reason to not do it.
I'm disappointed that you think I simply don't want to understand your POV, but I also think that's a cop-out. I've had several constructive conversation on these boards where other people have talked about why they own guns and what guns they feel they need and the situations they have or would use them in. Obviously they and I have different views about gun control, but at the same time their concerns have informed my understanding of the debate, and made me think more about how to address those concerns. That should speak for itself. But I do get where you're coming from - you're basically saying "The overwhelming majority of gun owners are responsible, law-abiding citizens. Why should we change because the other gun owners suck?"
My perspective is that you haven't set out your concerns like other posters have. Far from "perfectly viable reasons" you haven't given any reasons why America has an unusually high number of mass shootings, which is what the discussion was about. You went on an irrelevant tangent about how fully automatic weapons aren't used in mass shootings, like that matters when as you say the shooters will just go on to the next most convenient weapon. Even the example of Brazil that you chose didn't support the position that America has an ordinary number of mass shootings.
And frankly, while you're all for me understanding where you're coming from, I haven't seen much indication that you want to understand the opposite side of the debate. Your assumption that I want to get rid of all guns in America is very telling. But apparently you think it's all about self-righteousness, when really it's just about wanting to live safely. Just like many Americans feel safer owning guns, many other Americans feel safer without having them in their home, or in public spaces. Some Americans feel more at risk from home invasion - others feel the bigger risk is through accidents driving into the wrong driveway and getting shot, or mistaking your son for a burglar and shooting him, or having an armed school security guard leave his gun in the bathroom and a kid finding it. All of these are valid concerns - there's no "I have a gun because I worry about well-armed burglars, but those people worried these other things are just namby-pambies".
That's all. Toodles.
Country music star Mindy McCready commits suicide. Feb 17, 18:39
Hmmm - person with documented mental illness in possession of a gun - where have we heard that before. {nm} Feb 17, 23:54
on reruns of Canadian TV show Flashpoint (on Ion Cable Network) {nm} Feb 18, 06:04
Endless array of mass shootings in the USA with automatic weapons. Pay attention. {nm} Feb 18, 12:14
They're not "automatic". If you're going to spew your "righteousness", get it right. Else you just look stupid. {nm} Feb 18, 17:40
Pay attention. Those mass shootings weapons were mostly semi-automatic or fully automatic weapons. Feb 18, 20:27
I'm guessing it's pretty rare, since fully automatic weapons are so tightly regulated. {nm} Feb 19, 07:05
There's 240,000 fully automatic machine guns registered in private hands in the U.S. Expensive, but not difficult to obtain. Feb 19, 13:24
So you obviously agree that making guns slightly harder to get hold of = fewer shootings. That's great! {nm} Feb 19, 13:33
No, I do not agree with you. And it's clear that your argument using machine guns is so utterly baseless it's ludicrous. {nm} Feb 19, 15:12
Yet, making a semi-auto weapon full auto is trivial for anyone that can use a power tool & the Internet. Feb 19, 16:01
That completely avoids my simple question. Feb 19, 19:55
And you're avoiding the fact that they were rarely used even before the regulations were tightened in the 1980's. Feb 19, 22:10
I'm not trying to get you to agree with me - I just want you to understand how bad your argument is. Feb 20, 06:43
I should clarify a few things here... Feb 20, 12:30
Mass shootings in the US typically happen in "gun-free zones". Feb 19, 14:30
Mass shootings are a far bigger problem in the United States than other countries. Why do you think this is so? Feb 19, 15:54
There are a few reasons, most of which are controversial and I don't want to go into at this point in time. Feb 19, 16:03
You can email me if you want to keep it off the boards - but if not, have you been to America? Feb 19, 20:34
Try comparing countries of similar populations and population densities. {nm} Feb 19, 16:07
As John McClane is fond of saying, 'If you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem'. {nm} Feb 18, 12:21
Hmmm. Funny you'd say that... {nm} Feb 19, 09:15
Life is precious and irreplaceable however, people are not {nm} Feb 19, 00:15
